5? 


I 


I 


§ 

I  ^  i-i-I 

CO  £0 


1   <f^ 

JJk  i 

cMi^ 


54       § 


e  I 


*T*)I  3 


7      ^ 


ALL  AROUND  the  CIVIL  WAR 


OR 


BEFORE    AND    AFTER 


BY 


WILLIAM    HAWN 


/» 


"Set  down  naught  in  Malice" 


PRINTED  BY 

WYNKOOP  HALLENBECK  CRAWFORD  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK 


v  •;•:.. 


E4-S3 


DEDICATION. 
£2       *•  i  'HIS  booklet  is  respectfully  dedicated  to  the 

Jm* 

noble  women  of  the  South,  and  to  the  memory 

5 

<K      of  those  who  have  passed  away,  who  through  long 

3 

years  of  great  trial  and  almost  inconceivable  priva- 
tion devoted  their  efforts  with  Christian  zeal  to  en- 

CJ 

jr 

™       c  our  aging  the  soldiers  in  the  field;  to  nursing  the 

> 

§      sick,  and  to  comforting  the  dying. 

Their  untiring  energy,  their  fortitude  and  pa- 
tience under  the  most  trying  circumstances  to  which 


g       any  people  may  be  subjected,  are  worthy  the  emu- 

cat 

iu       lation  of  all  nations  through  all  time. 

W.  H. 


448935 


PREFACE. 

This  booklet  is  only  a  compilation  of  certain  well  known 
recorded  events — matters  of  history — opinions  of,  and  expres- 
sions by,  many  men,  with  some  reflections  by  the  compiler. 
What  it  contains  is  gathered  from  many  sources.  Any  opin- 
ions of  the  compiler  herein  expressed  were  and  are  honestly 
entertained,  and  are  honestly  expressed. 

Having  read  remarks  by  Hon.  G.  M.  Dallas,  Senator  from 
Pennsylvania,  that,  "The  Constitution  in  its  words  is  plain  and 
intelligible,  and  is  meant  for  the  homebred,  unsophisticated 
understandings  of  our  fellow  citizens,"1  and  by  Judge  Story, 
"A  Constitution  of  government  is  addressed  to  the  common 
sense  of  the  people  and  never  was  designed  for  trials  of  logical 
skill  or  visionary  speculation,"2  the  compiler  was  emboldened 
to  express  his  common  sense  understanding  of  its  meaning, 
as  to  certain  Articles. 

It  is  not  the  object  of  this  booklet  to  reawaken  the  ani- 
mosities of  half  a  century  ago — far  from  it.  The  hope  of  the 


14The  Constitution,"  W.  Hickey,  p.   27. 
"Idem,  p.  27. 


compiler  is  that  he  may  truthfully  present,  in  concise  form,  the 
reason  why  the  Southern  States  seceded — to  relieve  the  South- 
ern people  from  the  charge  of  treason — to  set  forth  briefly  the 
efforts  they  made  to  maintain  peace  in  order  that  their  de- 
scendants may  not,  under  the  influence  of  so-called  histories, 
false,  partizan  and  vituperative,  cease  to  honor  their  fathers. 

It  is  also  his  hope  that,  if  perchance  the  following  pages 
should  be  impartially  read  by  any  on  the  "opposite  side," 
erroneous  impressions  may  be  eradicated;  that  confidence  in 
the  Southern  people  may  be  restored,  and  that  they  truly  accept 
the  results  of  the  war  in  good  faith  may  be  believed. 

It  may  not  be  out  of  place  to  say  a  few  words  about  the 
compiler.  He  is  a  native  of  Alabama,  was  rocked  in  a  State's 
rights  cradle,  and  suckled  on  secession  pap;  was  in  the  Con- 
federate service  all  through  the  war;  from  his  youth  he 
favored  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  his  native  State;  now,  in 
the  "sere  and  yellow  leaf,"  he  yields  to  none  in  his  devotion 
to  the  Union  as  it  is. 

WM.  HAWN, 
Late  Seventh  Louisiana  Regiment. 


ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 


April  13,  1607,  the  first  permanent  settlement  by  English- 
men in  America  was  made  by  the  landing  of  about  one  hun- 
dred men  at  a  point  in  Virginia,  to  which  they  gave  the  name 
of  Jamestown,  in  honor  of  their  King,  James  I.  Nearly,  or 
quite  half  of  them  perished  in  the  first  summer  from  a  pesti- 
lence. 

It  is  needless  to  the  purpose  of  the  writer  to  dwell  upon 
the  hardships  of  this  first  colony ;  to  rehearse  their  sufferings ; 
to  trace  their  growth  in  numbers  and  expansion,  or  to  refer 
to  their  religion,  characters  or  surroundings,  for  this  purpose 
is  an  effort  to  show  that  the  Southern  States,  which  seceded 
from  the  United  States  in  1860-61,  exercised  a  power  reserved 
to  them  under  the  Constitution ;  that  they  were  driven  thereto 
by  the  General  Government  having  passed  into  the  control  of  a 
party  inimical  to  their  constitutional  rights;  that  African 
slavery  was  not  the  cause  of  secession,  but  only  an  incident, 
and  that  the  Southern  people  were  not  rebels. 

A  seed  had  been  planted  at  Jamestown  from  which  was  to 
arise  a  form  of  Republican-legislative  government,  and  a  lib- 


8  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL   WAR 

erty,  having  no  prior  existence  among  men ;  a  form  of  govern- 
ment destined  to  modify  all  others;  to  improve  the  conditions 
of  all  mankind,  and  to  become  one  of  the  greatest  world 
powers. 

Other  colonies  in  due  course  were  founded  by  peoples  from 
various  countries  which,  under  similar  conditions,  grew  and 
expanded  until  there  were  thirteen,  all  owning  allegiance  to 
the  British  crown. 

The  injustice  and  bad  faith  of  England  finally  drove  the 
colonies  to  rebel,  and  to  an  agreement  between  them  under 
the  title  of  "ARTICLES  OF  CONFEDERATION  AND  PERPETUAL 
UNION/' 

Sept.  5,  1774,  a  Congress  composed  "of  a  number  of  dele- 
gates, chosen  and  appointed  by  the  several  colonies  and  prov- 
inces of  North  America"  assembled  in  Philadelphia,  at  "The 
Carpenter's  Hall,"  the  object  of  the  Congress  being  to  form 
"a  bond  of  Union,"  and  "to  connect  the  powers  and  means  of 
the  colonies  for  the  common  defense." 

Nov.  15,  1777,  these  articles  were  agreed  to  by  the  dele- 
gates of  the  thirteen  original  States  in  Congress  assembled, 
subject  to  the  ratification  of  the  Legislatures  of  the  several 
States,  and  were  ratified  by  the  States  on  dates  as  follows : 

By  eight  States  July  9,  1778',  one  State  July  21,  1778',  one 


OR   BEFORE   AND   AFTER  9 

State  July  24,  1778 ;  one  State  Nov.  26,  1778 ;  one  State  Feb. 
22,  J//P ;  one  State  March  i,  1781. 

These  Articles  provided  that : 

1.  "The  style  of  this  Confederacy  shall  be  The  United 
States  of  America.' 

2.  "Each  State  retains  its  sovereignty,  freedom  and  inde- 
pendence, and  every  power,  jurisdiction  and  right  which  is 
not,  by  this  confederation,  delegated  to  the  United  States  in 
Congress  assembled. 

3.  "The  said   States  hereby  severally  enter  into  a  firm 
league  of  friendship  with  each  other  *  *  *  binding  them- 
selves to  assist  each  other  against  all  force  offered  to,  or  at- 
tacks made  upon  them,  or  any  of  them,  on  account  of  religion, 
sovereignty,  trade,  or  on  any  other  pretense  whatever. 

4.  "  *  *  *  and  the  people  of  each  State  shall  have  free 
ingress  and  regress  to  and  from  any  other  State,  and  shall  en- 
joy therein  all  the  privileges  of  trade  and  commerce  subject 
to  the  same  *  *  *  restrictions  as  the  inhabitants  thereof  re- 
spectively, provided  that  such  restriction  shall  not  extend  so 
far  as  to  prevent  the  removal  of  property  imported  into  any 
State  to  any  other  State  of  which  the  owner  is  an  inhabitant, 
etc. 


10 


5.  "Provides   for   the   appointment   of   delegates   to   the 
Congress  of  the  United  States,  etc. 

6.  "No  State,  without  the  consent  of  the  United  States 
in  Congress  assembled,  shall  *  *  *  enter  into  any  conference, 
agreement,  alliance  or  treaty,  etc. 

7.  "When  land  forces  are  raised  by  any  State  for  the 
common  defense,  all  officers  under  the  rank  of  Colonel  shall 
be  appointed  by  the  Legislature,  etc. 

8.  "Provides  for  charges  for  war  and  other  expenses,  etc. 

9.  "The  United  States  in  Congress  assembled  shall  deter- 
mine on  peace  or  war.     *  *  *  No  State  shall  be  deprived  of 
territory  for  the  benefit  of  the  United  States.     *  *  *  Settle- 
ments of  disputes  between   States  provided  for  *  *  *  also 
regulating  trade  with  Indians.     *  *  *  Establishing  or  regu- 
lating post  roads.    *  *  *  The  United  States  in  Congress  as- 
sembled shall  never  engage  in  war,  nor  enter  into  treaties,  nor 
appropriate  money  *  *  *  unites   nine   States  assent  to  the 
same. 

10.  "Confers   limited   powers   on   the   committee   of  the 
States,  or  any  nine  of  them. 

11.  "Canada  may  be  admitted  to  this  confederation,  etc. 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  n 

12.  "Provides  for  payment  of  bills  of  credit,  etc. 

13.  "Every  State  shall  abide  by  the  determination  of  the 
United  States  in  Congress  assembled,  on  all  questions  which, 
by  this  Confederation  is  submitted  to  them;  and  the  Articles 
of  this  Confederation  shall  be  inviolably  observed  by  every 
State,  and  the  Union  shall  be  Perpetual ;  nor  shall  any  altera- 
tion hereafter  be  made  in  any  of  them,  unless  such  altera- 
tion be  agreed  to  in  a  Congress  of  the  United  States,  and  be 
afterward  confirmed  by  the  Legislatures  of  every  State." 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  in  these  Articles  the  words 
"United  States"  occur  more  than  fifty  times,  and  only  twice 
is  the  word  United  written  with  a  capital  U,  in  Article  i  and 
in  Article  9,  which,  perhaps,  indicates  slight  respect  for  the 
Union ! 

These  Articles  were  soon  found  to  be  defective;  first,  in 
that  they  did  not  provide  "the  necessary  means  of  raising  a 
revenue,"  and  second,  in  the  absence  of  "power  to  regulate 
and  control  the  foreign  trade  and  commerce  of  the  country."1 

February  3,  1781,  a  member  from  New  Jersey  moved  a 
recommendation  to  the  States  that  Congress  be  vested  with 
additional  powers  to  provide  means  for  paying  the  public  debt 


1"The  Constitution,"   W.   Hickey,   p.   131. 


12  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL   WAR 

and  prosecuting  the  existing  war,  by  laying  duties  on  imports 
and  prize  goods.  Rhode  Island  refused  to  comply  with  this 
recommendation,  giving  under  three  heads  the  reasons  for 
such  refusal. 

These  reasons  were: 

First. — "That  the  proposed  duty  would  be  unequal  in  its 
operation,  bearing  hardest  upon  the  most  commercial  States, 
and  so  would  press  particularly  hard  upon  that  State  which 
draws  its  chief  support  from  commerce." 

To  this  the  Committee  of  Congress,  having  charge  of  the 
matter,  replied,  "that  every  duty  on  imports  is  incorporated 
with  the  price  of  the  commodity,  and  ultimately  paid  by  the 
consumer,  with  a  profit  on  the  duty  itself,  as  a  compensation 
to  the  merchant  for  the  advance  of  his  money." 

Second. — "That  the  recommendation  proposes  to  intro- 
duce into  that  and  the  other  States  officers  unknown  and  un- 
accountable to  them,  and  so  is  against  the  Constitution  of  the 
State." 

To  this  the  reply  was :  "The  doctrine  advanced  by  Rhode 
Island  would  perhaps  prove,  also,  that  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment ought  to  have  the  appointment  of  no  internal  officers 
whatever."  *  *  * 


OR  BEFORE   AND    AFTER  13 

Third. — "That  by  granting  to  Congress  the  power  to  col- 
lect moneys  from  the  commerce  of  these  States,  indefinitely 
as  to  time  and  quantity,  and  for  the  expenditure  of  which  they 
would  not  be  accountable  to  the  States,  they  (Congress) 
would  become  independent  of  their  constituents,  and  so  the 
proposed  impost  is  repugnant  to  the  liberty  of  the  United 
States." 

To  this  the  Committee  replied:  "The  fund  proposed  was 
sufficiently  definite  as  to  time  *  *  *  the  resolution  recom- 
mending the  duty  specifies  the  object  to  be  the  discharge  of 
debts  already  contracted,  etc."1 

The  arguments  of  the  Committee  prevailed,  and  the  "Arti- 
cles of  Confederation  and  Perpetual  Union,"  which  were 
agreed  to  by  the  delegates  of  all  the  States  in  Congress  as- 
sembled as  early  as  Nov.  15,  1777,  were  finally  ratified  by  the 
last  of  the  thirteen,  as  late  as  March  i,  1781,  having  been  prac- 
tically under  consideration  since  Sept.  5,  1774. 

DECLARATION   OF   INDEPENDENCE. 

July  4,  1776,  Congress  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  agreed 
to  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  which  reads,  in  part,  as 
follows : 


1<4The   Constitution,"   W.   Hickey,   p.    131 


i4  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

That  "all  men  are  born  free  and  equal ;  that  they  are  en- 
dowed with  certain  inalienable  rights;  that  among  these  are 
life,  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness ;  that  to  secure  these, 
governments  are  instituted  among  men,  deriving  their  just 
powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed ;  that  whenever  any 
form  of  government  becomes  destructive  of  these  ends,  it  is 
the  right  of  the  people  to  alter  or  abolish  it  and  to  institute 
a  new  government,  *  *  *  organizing  its  powers  in  such  form 
as  to  them  shall  seem  most  likely  to  effect  their  safety  and 
happiness.  *  *  *  But  when  a  long  train  of  abuses  and  usur- 
pations, pursuing  invariably  the  same  object,  evinces  a  design 
to  reduce  them  under  absolute  despotism,  it  is  their  right,  it 
is  their  duty,  to  throw  off  such  government,  and  to  provide 
new  guards  for  their  future  security.  Such  has  been  the  pa- 
tient sufferance  of  these  colonies,  and  such  is  now  the  neces- 
sity which  constrains  them  to  alter  their  former  systems  of 
government.  The  history  of  the  present  King  of  Great 
Britain  is  a  history  of  injuries  and  usurpations,  all  having  in 
direct  object  the  establishment  of  an  absolute  tyranny  over 
these  States ;  he  has  refused  his  assent  to  laws,  the  most  whole- 
some and  necessary  for  the  public  good ;  he  has  forbidden  his 
governors  to  pass  laws  of  immediate  and  pressing  importance ; 
he  has  refused  to  pass  other  laws  for  the  accommodation  of 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  15 

large  districts  of  people;  *  *  *  he  has  endeavored  to  prevent 
the  population  of  these  States ;  he  has  obstructed  the  adminis- 
tration of  justice;  he  has  excited  insurrections  amongst  us. 

"We  have  warned  them  from  time  to  time ;  *  *  *  we  have 
appealed  to  their  native  justice  and  magnanimity,  and  we 
have  conjured  them,  by  the  ties  of  our  common  kindred,  to 
disavow  these  usurpations,  which  would  inevitably  interrupt 
our  connections  and  correspondence;  they  have  been  deaf  to 
the  voice  of  justice  and  magnanimity.  We  must  therefore 
acquiesce  in  the  necessity  which  denounces  our  separation,  and 
hold  them,  as  we  hold  the  rest  of  mankind,  enemies  in  war,  in 
peace,  friends. 

"We,  therefore,  by  the  authority  of  the  good  people  of 
these  colonies,  solemnly  publish  and  declare,  That  these  United 
States  are,  and  of  right  ought  to  be,  Free  and  Independent 
States." 

This  declaration  was  signed  by  the  representatives  from 
the  "Free  and  Independent  States"  of  New  Hampshire,  Mas- 
sachusetts Bay,  Rhode  Island,  Delaware,  Connecticut,  Mary- 
land, New  York,  Virginia,  New  Jersey,  North  Carolina,  Penn- 
sylvania, South  Carolina  and  Georgia. 

It  will  be  seen  herein  and  hereafter,  how  the  practices  of 
the  King,  so  eloquently  protested  against  in  the  "Declaration 


16  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL   WAR 

of  Independence,"  were  revived  in  the  actions  of  a  sectional 
party,  which  arose  in  the  New  England  States  and  spread 
over  the  vast  domain,  which  was  freely  ceded  to  the  United 
States  by  the  State  of  Virginia. 

The  "Articles  of  Confederation  and  Perpetual  Union"  hav- 
ing proved  ineffectual  to  meet  the  exigencies  of  the  Union,  it 
was  necessary  that  a  better  system  should  be  devised.  Feb.  21, 
1787,  a  resolution  was  offered  in  Congress  that  recommenda- 
tion be  made  to  the  different  Legislatures  to  send  forward  to 
a  convention  to  be  held  in  Philadelphia  on  the  "second  Mon- 
day in  May  next,"  to  take  into  consideration  the  situation  of 
the  United  States,  etc.  This  resolution  was  passed  with  little 
delay.  Delegates  from  the  several  States  met  as  suggested. 
After  deliberate  and  candid  discussion,  the  Constitution,  as 
finally  prepared,  was  agreed  to  by  the  assembled  delegates,  on 
Sept.  17,  1787,  and  was  ratified  by  the  several  States  upon 
dates  ranging  from  Dec.  7,  1787,  to  May  29,  1790. 

THE  CONSTITUTION. 

The  articles  to  which  consideration  will  be  given  herein 
are: 

THE  EXORDIUM.— "We  the  people  of  the  United  States,  in 
order  to  form  a  more  perfect  Union,  establish  justice,  insure 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  17 

domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the  common  defense,  promote 
the  general  welfare  and  secure  the  blessings  of  Liberty  to  our- 
selves and  our  posterity,  do  ordain  and  establish  this  Consti- 
tution for  the  United  States  of  America. 

ARTICLE  i.  SEC.  8,  c.n.  The  Congress  shall  have  power 
— To  declare  war,  etc. 

12.  To  raise  and  support  armies,  etc. 

15.  To  provide  for  calling  forth  the  militia,  etc. 

ARTICLE  4.  SEC.  2,  c.i.  The  citizens  of  each  State  shall 
be  entitled  to  all  the  privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens  in 
the  several  States. 

c.3.  No  person  held  to  service  or  labour  in  one  of  the 
States,  under  the  laws  thereof,  escaping  into  another,  shall  in 
consequence  of  any  Law  or  Regulation  therein,  be  discharged 
from  such  services  or  labour,  but  shall  be  delivered  up  on 
claim  of  the  party  to  whom  such  service  or  labour  may  be  due. 

SEC  3,  c.i.  *  *  No  new  State  shall  be  formed  or  created 
within  the  jurisdiction  of  any  other  State,  etc. 

AMENDMENTS. 

ARTICLE  2.  A  well-regulated  militia  being  necessary  to  the 
security  of  a  Free  country,  the  right  of  a  people  to  keep  and 
bear  arms,  shall  not  be  infringed. 


i8  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

ARTICLE  4.  The  right  of  the  people  to  be  secure  in  their 
persons,  homes,  papers  and  effects,  against  unreasonable 
searches  and  seizures,  shall  not  be  violated,  etc. 

ARTICLE  9.  The  enumeration  in  the  Constitution  of  cer- 
tain rights  shall  not  be  construed  to  deny  or  disparage  others 
retained  by  the  people. 

ARTICLE  10.  The  powers  not  delegated  to  the  United 
States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States, 
are  reserved  to  the  States  or  to  the  people. 

SLAVERY. 

"This  year,  1619,  about  the  last  of  August,  came  a  Dutch 
man-of-war"  to  Jamestown,  Va.,  "that  sold  us  twenty  ne- 
gars"1  and  this  was  the  rising  upon  the  horizon  of  a  cloud- 
speck,  having  in  it  the  germ  of  a  mighty  storm  that  was  des- 

X 

tined  to  sweep  over  the  country,  spreading  death  and  destruc- 
tion over  a  once  happy  people — sacrificing  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  lives — costing  thousands  of  millions  of  dollars — and 
causing  the  compulsory  emancipation  of  nearly  four  millions 
of  negro  slaves,  without  compensation  to  their  owners,  and 
in  violation  of  the  Constitution.  (See  Art.  4,  Sec.  2,  clause  3, 
also  Amendments,  Articles  4,  5  and  10.)  Negro  slavery  thus 

1  "Virginia,"   Cooke,   p.    123. 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  19 

introduced,  soon  extended  to  all  the  other  colonies.  Slaves 
were  recognized  as  property;  owners  were  secured  in  their 
possession,  with  the  right  to  dispose  of  them  as  property  and 
to  remove  with  them  to  any  State.  Conditions  in  the  Northern 
and  Southern  States  were  so  diverse,  that  it  soon  became  evi- 
dent that  what  might  be  profitable  in  one  section  might  be 
unprofitable  in  the  other.  So  it  was  with  negro  slavery.  The 
Southern  States,  with  a  more  genial  climate,  a  more  fertile 
soil  and  a  difference  in  products,  were  better  adapted  for  the 
employment  of  negro  slaves,  than  were  the  Northern  or  New 
England  States.  The  people  of  the  North,  away  from  the  sea, 
were  farmers.  Their  products  were  mostly  hay  and  grain, 
but  the  climate  was  too  cold  for  the  negroes.  Near  the  sea 
the  people  were  fishermen,  manufacturers,  traders,  ship-build- 
ers and  sailors — occupations  requiring  skill  not  possessed  by 
the  slaves.  In  the  South  the  people  were  largely,  almost  ex- 
clusively, planters,  owning  large  areas  of  fertile  soil  and  rais- 
ing principally  tobacco,  cotton,  rice  and  sugar — crops  which 
could  be  successfully  cultivated  by  negro  slaves. 

Let  it  be  remembered  that  no  question  of  immorality  in 
buying,  selling,  working  or  holding  slaves  was  suggested  for 
many  years — in  either  the  Northern  or  Southern  States.  Un- 
der all  these  conditions,  those  who  held  slaves  in  the  North 


20 


were  glad  to  find  a  market  for  them  in  the  South,  and  it  was 
chiefly  through  this  market  that  slavery  became  extinct  in  the 
former.  And  not  only  did  the  Northern  slave  owners  con- 
tribute in  this  way  to  the  continuance  of  slavery,  but  being 
traders,  ship-builders  and  sailors,  some  of  them  engaged  in  the 
"African  slave  trade,"  organizing  companies  for  carrying  it 
on  and  making  fortunes  by  the  nefarious  traffic,  without  re- 
proach from  the  people  of  the  States  where  they  resided. 

It  is  related  of  one  James  D'Wolf,  who  was  a  Senator  from 
Rhode  Island,  that  he  resigned  from  the  Senate  to  become 
President  of  a  slave-trading  company.  Being  told  that  the 
trade  was  to  be  declared  piracy,  he  replied,  "So  much  the  bet- 
ter for  us;  the  'Yankees'  will  be  the  only  people  not  scared  off 
by  such  a  declaration"1 

From  what  has  been  said  it  appears  that  the  people  residing 
in  the  Northern  States  engaged  in  importing  slaves,  and  that 
the  Southern  people  were  not  at  all  engaged  in  it.  The  South- 
ern States  were  first  in  disapproving  the  slave  trade.  In  co- 
lonial days  Virginia  made  frequent  appeals  to  Great  Britain 
to  suppress  it,  but  was  overruled  by  the  Crown.  In  nearly 
every  Southern  State  laws  were  enacted  forbidding  the  im- 
portation of  slaves.  Virginia  was  the  first  State  to  prohibit  it. 

1"The  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Confederate  Government,"  J.  Davis,  Vol.   I,  p.   84. 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  21 

The  fact  is,  slavery  was  practically  forced  upon  the  South  for 
the  pecuniary  benefit  of  those  who  were  engaged  in  the 
"trade." 

Art.  i,  Sec.  9,  clause  i  of  the  Constitution  made  the  slave- 
trade  legitimate  until  the  year  1808.  In  1784  Virginia  ceded 
to  the  United  States  her  vast  territory  northwest  of  the  Ohio 
River.  The  ordinance  for  the  government  of  this  territory 
contained,  among  others,  one  article  which  provided  that 
"there  shall  be  neither  slavery  nor  involuntary  servitude  in 
the  said  territory,  etc.,"  which  provision  was  not  only  acceded 
to  by  Virginia,  but  the  ordinance  was  adopted  at  her  express 
instance.  Thus  it  is  evident  that  the  people  of  the  Southern 
States  deplored  the  existence  of  slavery;  that  they  were  not 
only  willing,  but  desirous  to  have  it  restricted  to  the  limits 
where  it  existed.  But  the  number  of  slaves  increased  rapidly, 
keeping  pace  with  the  general  increase  in  the  whole  country 
in  population  and  material  development,  and  when  a  political 
party  arose,  whose  aim  and  object  it  was  to  forcibly  emanci- 
pate the  slaves,  to  deprive  part  of  the  States  of  rights  guar- 
anteed to  them  by  the  Constitution,  and  protected  by  the  laws 
of  Congress — rights  which  the  highest  courts  had  decided  be- 
longed to  them;  after  having  appealed  to  Congress  and  to 
their  brethren  of  the  Northern  States  not  to  infringe  upon 


22 

these  rights,  it  was  painfully  evident  that  some  other  remedy 
must  be  found  to  secure  them,  and  the  only  thing  to  do  was  to 
withdraw  from  the  Union  and  set  up  a  government  of  their 
own.  Hence  came 

SECESSION. 

Examples  of  claims  for  the  right  to  secede  from  the  Union 
and  for  the  exercise  of  this  right  are  not  wanting.  The  first 
exercise  of  it  was  when  every  State  seceded  from  the  Union 
formed  under  the  "Articles  of  Confederation,"  and  formed  a 
new  Union  under  the  Constitution.  The  right  was  frequently 
"asserted  in  Massachusetts  and  other  New  England  States." 
The  acquisition  of  Louisiana  in  1803  was  made  a  special  occa- 
sion for  its  claim.  Mr.  Timothy  Pickering,  long  a  Senator 
from  Massachusetts,  in  a  letter  written  Dec.  24,  1803,  said: 
"I  will  not  yet  despair.  I  rather  anticipate  a  new  confederacy, 
exempt  from  the  corrupt  and  corrupting  influence  and  oppres- 
sion of  the  aristocratic  democrats  of  the  South.  There  will 
be  (and  our  children,  at  farthest,  will  see  it)  a  separation." 
In  another  letter  written  January  29,  1804,  he  said :  "The  prin- 
ciples of  our  Revolution  point  to  a  remedy — a  separation. 
That  this  can  be  accomplished,  and  without  spilling  one  drop 
of  blood,  I  have  little  doubt.  *  *  *  A  Northern  Confederacy 


O  R   BEFORE   AN D    AFTER  23 

would  unite  congenial  characters.  *  *  *  The  Southern 
States  would  require  the  naval  protection  of  the  Northern 
Union,  and  the  produce  of  the  former  would  be  important  to 
the  navigation  and  commerce  of  the  latter.  It  (the  separation) 
must  begin  in  Massachusetts,"  and  he  had  no  doubt  all  the 
New  England  States  would  join  the  new  confederacy — also 
New  York  and  New  Jersey.  In  February,  1804,  he  wrote 
further:  "The  public  debts  might  be  equitably  apportioned." 
"A  friendly  and  commercial  intercourse  would  be  maintained 
with  the  States  in  the  Southern  Confederacy.  *  *  *  It  is 
not  unusual  for  two  friends,  when  disagreeing  about  the  mode 
of  conducting  a  common  concern,  to  separate  and  manage, 
each  in  his  own  way,  his  separate  interest,  and  thereby  pre- 
serve a  useful  friendship  which,  without  such  separation, 
would  infallibly  be  destroyed."1 

In  1811  a  bill  for  the  admission  of  Louisiana  as  a  State 
being  under  consideration,  Mr.  Josiah  Quincy,  of  Massachu- 
setts, said :  "If  this  bill  passes,  it  is  my  deliberate  opinion 
that  it  is  virtually  a  dissolution  of  this  Union;  that  it  will  free 
the  States  from  their  moral  obligation;  and  as  it  will  be  the 
right  of  all,  so  it  will  be  the  duty  of  some,  definitely  to  prepare 


l"The  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Confederate  Government,"  J.   Davis,  Vol.   I,  pp.   71, 
72,  73-     (Quoted  from  "Life  of  Cabot  Lodge,"  pp.  334,  491,  338,  340,  446.) 


24 

for  a  separation — amicably  if  they  can,  -violently  if  they  must.' 
A  member  from  Mississippi  Territory  thereupon  called  Mr. 
Quincy  to  order,  and  was  sustained  by  the  speaker.  An  appeal 
was  taken  from  the  speaker's  decision,  and  it  was  reversed. 
Mr.  Quincy  then  proceeded,  saying,  "Is  there  a  principle  of 
public  law  better  settled  or  more  conformable  to  the  plainest 
suggestions  of  reason,  than  that  the  violation  of  a  contract  by 
one  of  the  parties  may  be  considered  as  exempting  the  other 
from  its  obligations,  etc."1 

In  December,  1814,  during  the  war  with  Great  Britain,  a 
convention,  composed  of  delegates  from  New  England  States, 
met  at  Hartford,  Conn.,  it  is  understood,  for  the  purpose  of 
considering  the  question  of  withdrawing  the  States  repre- 
sented, from  the  Union ;  and  it  is  beyond  doubt  that  this  matter 
was  considered  as,  in  a  published  report  they  say,  "some  new 
form  of  confederacy  should  be  substituted  among  those  States 
which  shall  intend  to  maintain  a  federal  relation  to  each  other. 
*  *  *  Whenever  it  shall  appear  that  the  causes"  (for  disso- 
lution) "are  radical  and  permanent,  a  separation  by  equitable 
arrangement  will  be  preferable  to  an  alliance  by  constraint 
among  nominal  friends,  but  real  enemies."2 


1"The  Rise  and  Fall  of  the  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  I,  pp.  73,  74,  75. 
2 Idem. 


OR   BEFORE   AN D   AFTER  25 

In  1844,  when  the  annexation  of  Texas  was  being  consid- 
ered, the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts  declared  that  "the  Com- 
monwealth of  Massachusetts,  faithful  to  the  compact  between 
the  people  of  the  United  States,  according  to  the  plain  mean- 
ing and  intent  in  which  it  was  understood  by  them,  is  sin- 
cerely anxious  for  its  preservation ;  but  that  it  is  determined,  as 
it  doubts  not  other  States  are,  to  submit  to  undelegated  powers 
in  no  body  of  men  on  earth" ;  and  "the  project  of  the  annexa- 
tion of  Texas,  unless  arrested  on  the  threshold,  may  tend  to 
drive  these  States  into  a  dissolution  of  the  Union."1 

Feb.  n,  1845,  tne  same  Legislature  declared  that,  "as  the 
powers  of  legislation  granted  in  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  to  Congress  do  not  embrace  a  case  of  the  admission  of 
a  foreign  State  or  foreign  territory,  by  legislation,  into  the 
Union ;  such  an  act  of  admission  would  have  no  binding  force 
whatever  on  the  people  of  Massachusetts." 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  above  that  almost  from  the  date 
when  the  Constitution  was  adopted,  that  is  from  1803  and  to 
1845,  tne  New  England  States  and  some  of  their  eminent 
statesmen  asserted,  contended  for  and  insisted  upon  the  right 
of  any  State  to  secede  from  the  Union,  and  that  each  State 
had  the  right  to  determine  for  itself  upon  what  provocation 


^'R.  &   F.   Confederate  Government,"  Vol.   I,  p.   76. 


26  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL   WAR 

this  right  should  be  exercised,  and  that  the  "Commonwealth 
of  Massachusetts,"  particularly,  asserted  the  right  to  construe 
the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  for  herself,  and  to  be  bound 
only  by  "the  plain  meaning  and  intent  with  which  it  was  under- 
stood by  them." 

The  right  to  secede  from  the  Union  was  clearly  reserved 
to  the  States,  as  the  right  to  coerce  a  State  is  not  conferred 
by  the  Constitution  upon  Congress. 

The  course  of  events  between  i5ji  (at  which  time  William 
Lloyd  Garrison  established  "The  Liberator,"  a  newspaper  per- 
sistently advocating  the  entire  and  immediate  abolition  of 
African  slavery  in  America)  and  1860,  when  Abraham  Lin- 
coln was  elected  President,  justified  the  people  in  the  Southern 
States  in  apprehending  that  the  policy  of  the  Government 
henceforward  would  be  not  merely  to  limit  African  slavery 
to  the  States  where  it  already  existed — was  recognized  by  the 
Constitution,  and  was  protected  by  the  Laws  of  the  country — 
but  to  abolish  it  in  all  the  States.  The  anti-slavery  party  had 
now  become  dominant — practically  sovereign — independent  of 
and  unlimited  by  any  other  power.  It  was  a  sectional  party. 
It  elected  to  the  presidency  a  man  who  had  said  that  the  Union 
"could  not  permanently  endure  half  slave  and  half  free." 
The  Constitution  had  been  denounced  as  a  "Covenant  with 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  27 

hell."  One  of  its  leaders  had  declared  that  "Congress  was 
bound  to  prohibit  it  (slavery)  in,  or  to  exclude  it  from  any 
and  every  Federal  Territory,"  thus  claiming  that  Congress 
could  set  aside  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  and  deprive 
certain  citizens  of  the  enjoyment  of  the  only  kind  of  property 
-which  was  especially  recognised  by  it. 

Another  leader  of  the  party  had  predicted  an  "irrepressible 
conflict,"  and  had  proclaimed  "a  higher  law  than  the  Con- 
stitution." The  meaning  of  all  which  is  that  the  party  was 
determined  to  rule  the  country  according  to  its  own  ideas, 
without  regard  to  Constitution  or  Law. 

What  caused  the  Northern  States  to  contemplate  their 
withdrawal  from  the  Union  in  1803,  1814  and  1845?  It  was 
not  that  any  of  their  Constitutional  rights  had  been  infringed, 
or  even  threatened;  it  was  not  that  their  material  interests 
were  endangered!  It  was  because  of  their  hatred  of  the  so- 
called  "Aristocratic  Democrats  of  the  South,"  and  because 
the  acquisition  of  Southern  territory  seemed  to  promise  addi- 
tional influence  to  the  South  in  the  government  of  the  country 
— a  seeming  promise  that  was  never  fulfilled,  as  this  acquisi- 
tion subsequently  contributed  greatly  to  the  enlargement  of 
their  commerce,  manufactures  and  wealth. 

It  may  be  not  improperly  asked,  "if  a  consideration  of  their 


28  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

material  prosperity  did  not  largely  influence  them  in  1861  to 
deny  to  the  South  the  right  previously  claimed  for  themselves  ?" 

Carefully  read  the  Declaration  of  Independence.  Where 
reference  is  made  to  the  King,  substitute  the  words  "Repub- 
lican Party,"  and  a  close  similarity  will  be  seen  between  the 
acts  of  the  former  and  those  of  the  later  (would-be)  sover- 
eign, committed  prior  and  subsequent  to  1860!  If  the  Anti- 
slavery  or  Republican  Party,  up  to  1860,  had  not  committed 
all  the  sins  against  the  Southern  States  which  the  King  had 
committed  against  the  colonies,  it  was  evident  that  they  were 
capable  of  them  and  intended  to  follow  his  example,  unless 
their  reckless  demands  were  submitted  to. 

The  imagined  dangers  to  their  interests  which  had  so  in- 
flamed the  Northern  mind  were  as  nothing,  even  if  they  were 
real,  when  compared  with  the  actual  danger  overhanging  the 
South  in  1860.  This  latter  danger  portended  the  overthrow 
of  the  Constitution,  the  obliteration  of  States'  rights ;  the  abso- 
lute subjection  of  the  Southern  to  the  Northern  States;  the 
loss  of  vast  property  and  the  utter  demoralization  of  their 
most  serious  domestic  concerns.  The  Southern  States  might, 
of  their  own  accord,  have  abolished  slavery,  and  there  was  a 
growing  sentiment  among  them  in  favor  of  so  doing,  not 
because  it  was  admitted  to  be  immoral,  but  for  the  reason 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  29 

that  its  continuance  would  permanently  prevent  the  influx  of 
a  desirable  population  and  the  development  of  great  natural 
resources.  But  the  intolerant  disposition  of  the  Northern 
people  checked  the  growth  of  this  sentiment,  and  united  the 
South  in  a  determination  to  resist  encroachment  upon  its  rights 
by  any  and  all  means.  The  compulsory  abandonment  of  a 
valuable  domestic  institution,  having  a  constitutional  legal  ex- 
istence, at  the  behest  of  a  combination  of  people  in  other 
States — people  who  were  almost  exclusively  responsible  for 
its  existence,  and  had  profited  by  establishing  it — would  have 
been  a  sacrifice  of  honor,  and  the  abnegation  of  self-respect  by 
a  people  claiming  both  in  an  eminent  degree. 

Eleven  States,  exercising  a  power  reserved  to  them  by 
virtue  of  the  fact  that  no  power  had  been  delegated  to  the 
United  States  to  prevent  it,  passed  Ordinances  of  Secession, 
and  three  others  were  prevented  from  doing  so  only  by  military 
forces  which  had  invaded  them. 

Attention  is  called  to  the  fact  that  a  "Perpetual  Union"  is 
not  provided  for  in  the  Constitution. 

Thomas  Jefferson  declared,  in  considering  the  principles  of 
the  Constitution,  "If  we  countenance  a  political  intolerance, 
despotic,  wicked,  capable  of  wicked  persecution,  we  have 
gained  little"  *  *  *  "the  support  of  the  State  governments 


30  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

in  all  their  rights  as  the  most  competent  administration  for 
our  domestic  concerns."1 

James  Madison,  referring  to  the  principles  of  the  Consti- 
tution, declared  the  purposes  of  Government  to  be  "to  prefer, 
in  all  cases,  amicable  discussion  and  reasonable  accommoda- 
tion of  differences,  to  a  decision  of  them  by  an  appeal  to  arms." 
*  *  *  «to  foster  a  Spjrit  of  independence,  too  just  to  invade 
the  rights  of  others,  too  proud  to  surrender  our  own;  to  re- 
spect the  rights  and  authorities  reserved  to  the  States  and  to 
the  people."2 

Numerous  citations  might  be  made  of  the  opinions  and 
remarks  of  eminent  men  from  both  sections  of  the  country — 
men  who  were  not  advocates  for  the  exercise  of  the  rights 
reserved  to  the  States — similar  to  the  above,  but  it  is  not  con- 
sidered necessary. 

It  has  been  said  that  the  South  acted  hastily  in  seceding, 
but  when  you  have  been  advised  that  your  house  is  to  be 
broken  into,  you  do  not  wait  until  the  burglar  has  gotten  in 
to  make  preparations  to  meet  the  emergency. 

The  idea  of  seceding  was  first  entertained  by  our  brethren 
of  Massachusetts.  Soon  after  the  founding  of  different  colo- 

14<The  Constitution,"  W.  Hickey,  p.  31. 
*Idem,  p.  32. 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  31 

nies  there  began  to  arise  sectional  jealousies.  The  Southern 
colonies  having  the  more  genial  climate,  the  more  fertile  soil 
and  a  more  extensive  area  than  the  Northern.  These  advan- 
tages naturally  led  to  the  apprehension  that  the  South  would 
become  the  more  populous  and  prosperous  section,  and  so  be- 
come dominant  in  the  Government.  It  was  therefore  inevi- 
table that,  in  the  formation  of  any  Union  of  the  colonies  under 
a  General  Government,  the  less  favored  section  should  desire 
such  organization  as  would  provide  for  a  "Perpetual  Union" 
(as  was  set  forth  in  the  preamble  and  title  of  the  "Articles  of 
Confederation,  etc.,"  adopted  by  Congress  Nov.  5,  1777,  and 
subsequently  ratified  by  the  several  Legislatures),  and  would 
also  provide  for  reciprocal  commerce.  The  Organization  ef- 
fected under  the  "Articles"  was  found  inadequate  to  the  "exi- 
gencies of  the  Union,  "in  that  they  did  not  provide  means 
sufficient  to  pay  the  debts  already  incurred  and  to  meet  current 
expenses."  Steps  were  taken  to  remedy  these  defects,  and  in 
a  Constitution,  superseding  the  "Articles  of  Confederation," 
powers  were  conferred  upon  Congress  to  raise  revenue  and  to 
regulate  commerce. 

That  the  "Articles  of  Confederation,  etc.,"  would  estab- 
lish a  "Perpetual  Union,"  and  that  the  Constitution  which 
superseded  them  makes  no  reference  to  such  thing,  argues  that 


32  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL,  WAR 

the  idea  was  abandoned  as  an  absurdity,  if  by  "Perpetual,"  it 
was  meant  that  the  Union  would  be  "neverceasing-unend- 
ing."  If  the  Union  formed  was  to  exist  perpetually,  it  fol- 
lows that  the  agreement  by  which  it  was  formed  must  also  be 
"neverceasing-unending,"  and  this  we  have  seen  is  not  the 
case,  as  that  agreement  was  made  null  and  void  by  the  adop- 
tion of  the  Constitution,  whereby  all  the  States  seceded  from 
the  former  Union. 

If  the  prerogative  of  secession  was  claimed  by  the  New 
England  States,  for  reasons  which  justified  it  to  their  own 
judgments,  how  could  they  conscientiously  deny  it  to  other 
and  equal  States? 

When  South  Carolina  ceded  to  the  United  States  forts  and 
sites  for  their  erection  within  her  boundaries,  it  was  done  upon 
certain  conditions,  by  which  the  United  States  were  to  repair 
the  fortifications  already  existing,  and  to  keep  a  garrison  or 
garrisons  therein,  within  three  years  from  the  passage  of  the 
act,  and  if  these  things  were  not  done  as  stipulated,  in  such 
case  the  grant  or  cession  was  to  be  null  and  void.1  These  con- 
ditions were  not  complied  with,  and  consequently  the  owner- 
ship of  the  forts  and  sites  reverted  to  the  State,  and  possession 


a"R.   &  F.   Confederate  Government,"  Vol.   I,  p.  210.     Quoted   from   Statutes  at 
Large  of  S.  C.,  Vol.  V,  p.  501. 


OR   BEFORE   AN D    AFTER  33 

was  demanded  when  the  State  resumed  sovereignty.  This, 
however,  was  refused. 

When  New  York  granted  a  site  for  the  Brooklyn  Navy 
Yard,  it  was  done  on  the  express  condition  that  "so  long  as  the 
said  tract  shall  be  applied  to  the  defense  and  safety  of  the  city 
and  port  of  New  York,  and  no  longer,  shall  the  United  States 
retain  it."1 

When  Massachusetts  made  similar  cession,  she  claimed 
concurrent  jurisdiction.2 

From  the  above  it  is  seen  that,  in  the  cases  mentioned,  the 
forts  and  sites  were  not  conveyed  to  the  United  States  in  fee 
simple,  or  to  hold  forever. 

On  Dec.  20,  1860,  South  Carolina  passed  an  Ordinance  of 
secession.  Almost  immediately  thereafter  she  sent  to  Wash- 
ington commissioners  to  "Treat  with  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  for  the  delivery  of  the  forts  *  *  *  for  an  ap- 
portionment of  the  public  debt  *  *  *  for  the  continuance  of 
peace  and  amity,  etc.,"  evincing  a  desire  to  deal  honorably 
and  in  good  faith. 

Dec.  n,  1860,  Major  Robert  Anderson,  who  with  a  gar- 
rison occupied  Fort  Moultrie,  in  Charleston  Harbor,  received 


1"R.   &  F.   Confederate  Government,"  Vol.   I,  p.  209. 

2 Idem.     Quoted  from  Revised   Statutes  of  Mass.,   1836,  p.   56. 


34  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

instructions  from  the  War  Department  in  Washington  in  part, 
as  follows :  "Carefully  avoid  every  act  which  would  needlessly 
tend  to  provoke  aggression."  *  *  *  "You  are  not,  without 
evident  and  imminent  necessity,  to  take  up  any  position  which 
could  be  construed  into  the  assumption  of  a  hostile  attitude." 
*  *  *  "An  attack  upon  either  of  them  (the  three  forts  in 
Charleston  Harbor)  will  be  regarded  as  an  act  of  hostility,  and 
you  may  then  put  your  command  in  either  of  them."1 

The  Commissioners  reached  Washington  Dec.  26,  1860, 
but  before  they  could  communicate  with  President  Buchanan, 
they  learned  that  Major  Anderson  had  "secretly  dismantled 
Fort  Moultrie  and  had  occupied  Fort  Sumter" — a  more  com- 
manding position — thus  changing  the  status  quo,  in  which  it 
was  understood  President  Buchanan  had  agreed  there  should 
be  no  change,  the  assurance  having  been  made  to  him  by  South 
Carolina's  representatives  in  Congress  that  there  was  no  pres- 
ent intention  of  attacking  the  forts.  It  cannot  be  doubted  that 
Major  Anderson  thought  much  was  permitted  to  his  own  dis- 
cretion; that  he  was  governed  by  a  sense  of  honor  and  duty; 
nevertheless,  his  act  was  looked  upon  by  the  people  of  South 
Carolina  as  one  of  bad  faith.  The  Commissioners,  in  a  letter 


1"R.  &  F.   Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  I,  p.   212.     Quoted  from   Buchanan's 
Administration,  Chap.  IX,  p.  165  and  Chap.  II,  pp.  212-214. 


OR  BEFORE   AN D   AFTER  35 

addressed  to  the  President  Dec.  28,  1860,  protested  against  it, 
and  entreated  him  to  withdraw  the  troops  from  Charleston 
Harbor  to  prevent  a  bloody  issue  from  "questions  which  ought 
to  be  settled  with  temperance  and  judgment."1  They  also 
called  his  attention  to  the  fact  that  South  Carolina  "could,  at 
any  time  within  the  last  sixty  days,  have  taken  possession  of 
the  forts."2  To  this  letter  the  President  replied  Dec.  30th,  that 
he  had  "no  authority  to  decide  what  shall  be  the  relations  be- 
tween the  Federal  Government  and  South  Carolina."3  This 
question  he  had  not  been  asked  to  decide,  but  as  Commander- 
in-Chief  of  the  Army  and  Navy  of  the  United  States,  he  did 
have  the  authority  to  withdraw  the  troops. 

The  President  replied  further,  *  *  *  "It  is  therefore  my 
duty  to  submit  to  Congress  the  whole  question  in  all  its  bear- 
ings. *  *  *  It  is  not  believed  that  any  attempt  will  be  made 
to  expel  the  United  States  from  this  property  by  force."  "It 
was  my  determination  *  *  *  not  to  reinforce  the  forts  in  the 
harbor  and  thus  produce  a  collision,  until  they  had  been  actu- 
ally attacked*  or  until  I  had  certain  evidence  that  they  were 
about  to  be  attacked." 

About  Dec.  28th  the  President  was  informed  that  "the 


1"R.  &  F.   Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  I,  p.   592. 
2  Idem. 
*Idem,  p.  593. 


36  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL   WAR 

Palmetto  flag  floated  out  to  the  breeze  at  Castle  Pinckney,  and 
a  large  military  force  went  over  last  night  {2?th)  to  Fort 
Moultrie,"  and  in  connection  with  this  he  wrote:  "Thus  the 
authorities  of  South  Carolina,  *  *  *  doubtless  believing 
*  *  *  that  the  officer  had  acted  not  only  without,  but  against 
my  orders,  etc."1 

It  is  not  to  be  inferred  that,  in  occupying  forts  and  raising 
her  flag  over  them,  she  intended  to  attack  Fort  Sumter,  but 
rather  to  prepare  for  defense  against  attack,  which  an  act  of 
bad  faith,  as  she  construed  ft,  led  her  to  believe  would  be  made 
on  her. 

Jan.  i,  1861,  the  Commissioners,  replying  to  the  Presi- 
dent's communication  of  Dec.  30th,  wrote :  *  *  *  "In  your 
annual  message  you  declared  that  you  had  no  right  and  would 
not  attempt  to  coerce  a  seceding  State.  *  *  *  You  did  not 
reinforce  the  garrisons  in  the  harbor  of  Charleston.  You  re- 
moved a  distinguished  and  veteran  officer  from  the  command 
of  Fort  Moultrie,  because  he  attempted  to  increase  his  supply 
of  ammunition.  You  refused  to  send  additional  troops  to  the 
same  garrison  when  applied  for  by  the  officer  appointed  to  suc- 
ceed him.  You  accepted  the  resignation  of  the  oldest  and 
most  eminent  member  of  your  Cabinet,  rather  than  allow  the 

l"R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  I,  pp.  594-596. 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  37 

garrison  to  be  strengthened.  You  compelled  an  officer  sta- 
tioned at  Fort  Sumter  to  return  immediately  to  the  arsenal 
forty  muskets  which  he  had  taken  to  arm  his  men."  *  *  * 
Referring  to  Major  Anderson's  evacuating  Fort  Moultrie, 
spiking  the  guns,  etc.,  and  removing  to  Fort  Sumter,  the  Com- 
missioners wrote  to  the  President,  "This  is  war.  *  *  *  For 
this  act,  with  all  its  attending  circumstances,  was  as  much  war 
as  firing  a  volley.  *  *  *  You  have  resolved  to  hold  by  force 
what  you  have  obtained  through  our  misplaced  confidence. 
*  *  *  By  your  course  you  have  probably  rendered  civil  war 
inevitable."  This  was  the  last  communication  from  the  Com- 
missioners to  the  President,  and  he  declined  to  receive  it,  as 
shown  by  an  endorsement  on  it,  because  "it  is  of  such  a  char- 
acter, etc." 

In  February,  1861,  a  plan  was  proposed  for  reinforcing 
and  furnishing  supplies  to  the  garrison  of  Fort  Sumter.  Lieu- 
tenant-General  Scott  advised  the  President  that  the  fort  could 
not  be  relieved  and  must  be  given  up.1  March  i^th,  the  pro- 
posal was  renewed,  Mr.  Lincoln  at  this  time  being  President, 
and  he  agreed  to  it.  A  confidential  agent  was  sent  to  Charles- 
ton to  "spy  out  the  land,"  the  better  to  determine  the  practica- 
bility of  carrying  out  the  plan.  This  agent  arrived  in  Charles- 


1"R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  I,  p.  271. 


38  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL   WAR 

ton  March  21,  1861.  He  obtained  permission  from  Governor 
Pickens  to  visit  the  fort  "expressly  upon  the  pledge  of  pacific 
purposes."1  The  plan  was  not  made  known  to  Major  Ander- 
son by  this  agent,  but  he  was  aware  that  suggestion  had  been 
made  for  the  relief  and  reinforcement  of  the  garrison,  for  on 
April  8th,  he  had  written  to  the  Adjutant-General  United 
States  Army  that  *  *  *  "it  is,  of  course,  now  too  late  for 
me  to  give  any  advice  in  reference  to  the  proposed  scheme. 
I  fear  that  its  results  cannot  fail  to  be  disastrous  to  all  con- 
cerned."2 The  agent  returned  to  Washington  and  reported; 
his  plan  was  approved  by  President  Lincoln,  and  he  was  sent 
to  New  York  to  make  arrangements  for  its  execution.  An- 
other confidential  agent  soon  followed  the  first — one  Lamon — 
who  announced  that  "he  had  come  to  arrange  for  the  removal 
of  the  garrison"  and  said  "he  hoped  to  return  in  a  few  days 
for  that  purpose."3 

Other  States  than  South  Carolina  sent  Commissioners  to 
Washington  hoping  to  arrange  for  peaceable  separation  and 
the  avoidance  of  war,  but  all  efforts  directed  to  this  end  proved 
unavailing.  It  was  evidently  the  intention  of  the  Federal 
Government  to  coerce  the  seceding  States,  and  all  promises 

1"R.  &  F,  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  I,  p.  272. 
"Idem,  p.  283. 
sldem,  p.  272. 


39 

not  to  reinforce  Fort  Sumter  were  made  in  bad  faith — with 
intent  to  deceive. 

Jan.  p,  1861,  a  vessel,  loaded  with  troops,  attempted  to 
enter  Charleston,  but  was  driven  away  by  batteries  on  the 
shore.  All  efforts  made  by  individual  States  and  by  the  Con- 
federate Government  to  avoid  war  having  failed,  Fort  Sumter 
was  fired  upon  April  12,  1861,  due  notice  having  been  given 
to  the  commanding  officer.  The  next  day  the  fort  surren- 
dered, and  the  garrison  was  permitted  to  retire  with  the  honors 
of  war.  At  this  time  a  fleet  of  armed  vessels  was  lying  off  the 
port  of  Charleston,  and  the  commander  of  the  Pawnee  is 
reported  to  have  refused  to  enter  without  orders  from  a  supe- 
rior, "There  to  inaugurate  civil  war"1 

While  these  things  were  taking  place  around  Charleston, 
the  general  condition  of  the  country,  the  right  of  secession, 
etc.,  were  freely  discussed  in  newspapers  and  in  all  places 
where  "two  or  three  were  gathered  together." 

March  4,  1861,  President  Lincoln,  in  his  inaugural  mes- 
sage, said:  "I  have  no  purpose,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  in- 
terfere with  the  institution  of  slavery  in  the  States  where  it 


1"R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  I,  p.  292. 


40  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

exists;  I  believe  I  have  no  lawful  right  to  do  so,  and  I  have  no 
inclination  to  do  so."1 

When  Gen.  John  C.  Fremont  issued  a  proclamation, 
emancipating  the  slaves  of  certain  persons,  President  Lincoln 
countermanded  it.  But  Jan.  i,  1863,  Mr.  Lincoln  issued  a 
"Proclamation  of  Emancipation,"  declaring  all  slaves  in  the 
seceding  States  to  be  free.  There  is  certainly  no  authority 
conferred  upon  a  President  by  the  Constitution  to  take  such 
step  under  any  circumstances. 

Nov.  9,  1860,  The  New  York  Tribune  said,  "We  hold  with 
Jefferson  to  the  inalienable  right  of  communities  to  alter  or 
abolish  forms  of  government  that  have  become  oppressive  or 
injurious ;  and  if  the  Cotton  States  shall  decide  that  they  can 
do  better  out  of  the  Union  than  in  it,  we  insist  on  letting  them 
go  in  peace.  The  right  to  secede  may  be  a  revolutionary  right, 
but  it  exists,  nevertheless;  and  we  do  not  see  how  one  party 
can  have  a  right  to  do  what  another  party  has  a  right  to  pre- 
vent. We  must  resist  the  asserted  right  of  any  State  to  re- 
main in  the  Union  and  nullify  or  defy  the  laws  thereof;  to 
withdraw  from  the  Union  is  quite  another  matter.  And, 
whenever  a  considerable  section  of  our  Union  shall  deliber- 
ately resolve  to  go  out,  we  shall  resist  all  coercive  measures 

l"R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  I,  p.  262. 


OR   BEFORE   AN D    AFTER  41 

designed  to  keep  her  in.  We  hope  never  to  live  in  a  republic 
whereof  one  section  is  pinned  to  the  residue  by  bayonets." 

The  Albany  Argus  said,  "We  sympathize  with  and  justify 
the  South  as  far  as  this :  their  rights  have  been  invaded  to  the 
extreme  limit  possible  within  the  forms  of  the  Constitution; 
and,  beyond  this  limit,  their  feelings  have  been  insulted  and 
their  interests  and  honor  assailed  by  almost  every  form  of 
denunciation  and  invective;  and  if  we  deemed  it  certain  that 
the  real  animus  of  the  Republican  Party  could  be  carried  into 
the  administration  of  the  Federal  Government  and  become  the 
permanent  policy  of  the  nation,  we  should  think  that  all  the 
instincts  of  self-preservation  and  of  manhood  rightfully  im- 
pelled them  to  resort  to  a  revolution  and  a  separation  from 
the  Union,  and  we  would  applaud  them  and  wish  them  God- 
speed in  the  adoption  of  such  a  remedy."  (The  South  was 
fully  convinced  "that  the  real  animus  of  the  Republican  Party" 
had  "become  the  permanent  policy  of  the  nation.") 

In  a  later  issue  The  Albany  Argus  said,  "If  South  Caro- 
lina, or  any  other  State,  through  a  convention  of  her  people 
shall  formally  separate  herself  from  the  Union,  probably  both 
the  present  and  the  next  Executive  will  simply  let  her  alone 
and  quietly  allow  all  the  functions  of  the  Federal  Government 
within  her  limits  to  be  suspended.  Any  other  course  would  be 


42 

madness,  as  it  would  at  once  enlist  all  the  Southern  States  in 
the  controversy  and  plunge  the  whole  country  into  a  civil  war. 
*  *  *  As  a  matter  of  policy  and  wisdom,  therefore,  independ- 
ent of  the  question  of  right,  we  should  deem  resort  to  force 
most  disastrous." 

The  New  York  Herald  said,  "Each  State  is  organized  as 
a  complete  government,  holding  the  purse  and  wielding  the 
sword,  possessing  the  right  to  break  the  tie  of  the  confedera- 
tion as  a  nation  might  break  a  treaty,  and  to  repel  coercion  as 
a  nation  might  repel  invasion.  *  *  *  Coercion,  if  it  were 
possible,  is  out  of  the  question." 

Jan.  31,  1861,  at  a  mass  meeting  in  the  city  of  New  York, 
Mr.  James  S.  Thayer  said:  "We  can  at  least  *  *  *  arrive 
at  the  basis  of  a  peaceable  separation;  we  can  *  *  *  en- 
lighten, settle  and  concentrate  the  public  sentiment  in  the  State 
of  New  York  upon  this  question  and  save  it  from  that  fearful 
current,  which  circuitously  but  certainly  sweeps  madly  on, 
through  the  narrow  gorge  of  'the  enforcement  of  the  laws/ 
to  the  shoreless  ocean  of  civil  war.  Against  this,  under  all 
circumstances,  in  every  place  and  form,  we  must  now  and  at 
all  times  oppose  a  resolute  and  unfaltering  resistance.  *  *  * 
If  a  revolution  of  force  is  to  begin,  it  shall  be  inaugurated  at 
home.  And  if  the  incoming  administration  shall  attempt  to 


OR  BEFORE   AND   AFTER  43 

carry  out  the  line  of  policy  that  has  been  foreshadowed,  we 
announce  that  when  the  hand  of  Black  Republicanism  turns  to 
blood-red,  and  seeks  from  the  fragments  of  the  Constitution 
to  construct  a  scaffolding  for  coercion — another  name  for  exe- 
cution— we  will  reverse  the  order  of  the  French  Revolution, 
and  save  the  blood  of  the  people  by  making  those  who  would 
inaugurate  a  reign  of  terror  the  first  victims  of  a  national 
guillotine." 

At  the  same  meeting,  ex-Governor  Seymour  asked  the 
questions  whether  "successful  coercion  by  the  North  is  less 
revolutionary  than  successful  secession  by  the  South?  Shall 
we  prevent  a  revolution  by  being  foremost  in  overthrowing 
the  principles  of  our  Government  and  all  that  makes  it  valu- 
able to  our  people  and  distinguishes  it  among  the  nations  of 
the  earth?" 

And  ex-Chancellor  Walworth  said  :  "It  would  be  as  brutal, 
in  my  opinion,  to  send  men  to  butcher  our  own  brothers  of  the 
Southern  States,  as  it  would  be  to  massacre  them  in  the  North- 
ern States.  We  are  told,  -however,  that  it  is  our  duty  to,  and 
we  must,  enforce  the  laws.  But  why — and  what  laws  are  to 
be  enforced?  There  were  laws  to  be  enforced  in  the  time  of 
the  American  Revolution.  *  *  *  Did  Lord  Chatham  go  for 
enforcing  those  laws?  No,  he  gloried  in  defense  of  the  liber- 


44  ALL  AROUND   THE  CIVIL   WAR 

ties  of  America.  He  made  that  memorable  declaration  in  the 
British  Parliament,  'If  I  were  an  American  citizen  instead  of 
being,  as  I  am,  an  Englishman,  I  would  never  submit  to  such 
laws.  Never,  never,  never.' ' 

In  February,  1861,  The  Detroit  Free  Press  said,  "If  there 
should  not  be  a  change  in  the  present  seeming  purpose  to  yield 
to  no  accommodation  of  the  national  difficulties,  and  if  troops 
shall  be  raised  in  the  North  to  march  against  the  people  of 
the  South,  a  fire  in  the  rear  will  be  opened  upon  such  troops, 
which  will  either  stop  their  march  altogether  or  wonderfully 
accelerate  it." 

The  Union  newspaper,  published  in  Bangor,  Me.,  said, 
"The  difficulties  between  the  North  and  the  South  must  be 
compromised,  or  the  separation  of  the  States  shall  be  peaceable. 
If  the  Republican  Party  refuse  to  go  the  full  length  of  the 
Crittenden  amendment — which  is  the  very  least  the  South  can 
or  ought  to  take — then,  here  in  Maine,  not  a  Democrat  will  be 
found  who  will  raise  his  arm  against  his  brethren  of  the  South. 
From  one  end  of  the  State  to  the  other  let  the  cry  of  the  De- 
mocracy be,  COMPROMISE  OR  PEACEABLE  SEPARA- 
TION." 

(The  Crittenden  amendment  proposed,  among  other  things, 
the  restoration  and  incorporation  into  the  Constitution  of  the 


O  R   BEFORE    AN  D    AFTER  45 

Missouri  Compromise,  rnade  in  1820,  which  established  a 
line,  36'  30"  north  latitude,  above  which  slavery  was"  ex- 
cluded. Much  of  this  northern  territory  had  been  acquired 
from  France  by  treaty  and  purchase,  and  the  treaty  was  vio- 
lated by  such  exclusion,  as  it  guaranteed  to  the  inhabitants  of 
safld  territory  "all  the  rights,  advantages  and  immunities  of 
citizens  of  the  United  States,  and  the  free  enjoyment  of  their 
liberty,  property  and  the  religion  they  profess.") 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  words  of  eminent  men  and  influ- 
ential newspapers,  as  above  quoted — men  and  newspapers  of 
various  party  affiliations  and  of  no  party  affiliations — that  there 
existed  in  many  of  the  Northern  States  a  decided  sentiment 
opposed  to  coercion,  and  in  favor  of  the  States'  rights  doctrine 
upon  which  the  South  claimed  the  right  of  secession. 

March  19,  1861,  The  New  York  Herald,  referring  to  the 
Constitution  of  the  Confederate  States  which  had  been  adopted 
March  n,  said,  "The  Constitution  is  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  with  various  modifications  and  some  very  im- 
portant and  most  desirable  improvements.  We  are  free  to 
say  that  the  invaluable  reforms  enumerated  should  be  adopted 
by  the  United  States,  with  or  without  a  reunion  of  the  seceded 
States,  and  as  soon  as  possible.  But  why  not  accept  them 


46  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

with  the  propositions  of  the  Confederate  States  on  slavery  as 
a  basis  of  reunion?" 

Fort  Sumter  having  surrendered  on  April  13,  1861,  on 
April  i$th  President  Lincoln  called  out  the  military  of  the 
several  States  to  the  number  of  seventy-five  thousand  men, 
and  this  hastened  the  convention  of  Virginia  delegates  to  pass 
an  ordinance  of  secession,  which  was  done  April  ijth,  and 
war  began  in  earnest.  The  Constitution  confers  upon  Con- 
gress power  to  "raise  armies  and  to  declare  war."  There  is 
not  one  word  in  it  that  can  by  any  possibility  be  construed  into 
meaning  that  the  President  has  such  power.  His  calling  for 
seventy-five  thousand  men  was  an  usurpation. 

The  war  now  begun  continued  until  the  spring  of  1865. 
April  9,  1865,  General  R.  E.  Lee  surrendered  to  General  U.  S. 
Grant. 

April  26,  1865,  General  J.  E.  Johnston  surrendered  to 
General  W.  T.  Sherman,  and  all  other  Confederate  armies 
finally  surrendered.  The  de  facto  government  was  a  thing  of 
the  past. 

The  war  had  been  conducted  on  the  part  of  the  Confed- 
erate States  with  strict  regard  to  the  rules  of  war  among  civil- 
ized peoples.  On  the  part  of  the  Federal  Government  these 
rules  were  not  so  strictly  observed.  Numerous  acts  of  cruelty* 


OR  BEFORE  AND  AFTER  47 

and  outrage  were  committed.  "They  waged  an  indiscriminate 
war  upon  all :  private  houses  in  isolated  places  were  bom- 
barded and  burned ;  grain  crops  in  the  field  were  consumed  by 
the  torch;  and  when  the  torch  was  not  applied,  careful  labor 
was  bestowed  to  render  complete  the  destruction  of  every 
article  of  use  or  ornament  remaining  in  private  dwellings 
after  their  female  inhabitants  had  fled  from  the  insults  of 
brutal  soldiers;  a  petty  war  was  made  on  the  sick,  including 
women  and  children,  by  carefully  devised  measures  to  prevent 
them  from  obtaining  necessary  medicines."1  Generals  Sher- 
man, Sheridan,  Pope,  Hunter,  B.  F.  Butler,  Milroy,  and 
Colonels  Grierson  and  Dahlgren,  were  chief  among  those  who 
violated  those  rules.  The  only  act  of  retaliation  by  any  Con- 
federate force  during  the  war  was  that  of  General  J.  A.  Early, 
committed  on  Chambersburg,  Pa.,  July  30,  1864,  when  the 
town  was  burned  after  notice  had  been  given  of  his  intention. 
Many  prisoners  being  captured  from  time  to  time,  the  dic- 
tates of  humanity  demanded  that  arrangements  should  be 
made  for  their  exchange.  A  cartel  for  this  purpose  was  exe- 
cuted July  22,  1862.  The  carrying  out  of  this  agreement  was 
made  difficult  by  the  officials  of  the  Federal  Government  upon 
various  pretexts.  General  B.  F.  Butler,  who  was  thought  to 


1"R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  II,  p.  5. 


48  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

be  responsible  for  delaying  or  interrupting  the  carrying  out 
the  cartel,  says  in  his  defense  that  he  was  directed  "to  put  the 
matter  offensively  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  an  ex- 
change."1 On  August  18,  1864,  General  U.  S.  Grant  wrote  to 
General  Butler:  "It  is  hard  on  our  men  held  in  Southern 
prisons  not  to  exchange  them,  but  it  is  humanity  to  those  left 
in  the  ranks  to  fight  our  battles.  Every  man  released  on 
parole,  or  otherwise,  becomes  an  active  soldier  against  us, 
either  directly  or  indirectly.  If  we  commence  a  system  of  ex- 
change, which  liberates  all  prisoners  taken,  we  will  have  to 
fight  on  until  the  whole  South  is  exterminated.  If  we  hold 
those  caught,  they  amount  to  no  more  than  dead  men.  At  this 
particular  time  to  release  all  rebel  prisoners  North  would  in- 
sure Sherman's  defeat,  and  would  compromise  our  safety 
here."2  So  the  cartel  was  made  null  and  void. 

An  impression  has  been  made  upon  the  minds  of  the 
Northern  people  that  the  Confederate  authorities  were  re- 
sponsible for  all  the  sufferings  of  prisoners  held  in  the  South. 
This  responsibility  is  not  only  denied  by  the  facts,  but  is  shown 
to  rest  upon  the  Federals.  The  supplies  of  medicine  in  the 
Confederacy  were  entirely  inadequate  for  the  necessities  of 


ll'R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  II,  p.  599. 
2  Idem,  p.  600. 


OR  BEFORE   AN  D    AFTER  49 

the  people.  In  1864  Commissioner  Ould  "made  an  offer  to 
the  United  States  authorities  to  purchase  medicines  from  them 
to  be  used  exclusively  for  the  relief  of  Union  prisoners.  He 
offered  to  pay  in  gold,  cotton  or  tobacco,  and  even  to  pay  two 
or  three  prices  if  required,  and  agreed  that  such  medicines 
might  be  brought  into  the  Confederate  lines  by  United  States 
surgeons  and  dispensed  by  them."1  To  this  offer  no  reply  was 
ever  received. 

The  prison  at  Andersonville,  Ga.,  was  one  in  which  a  large 
number  of  Union  prisoners  were  confined,  and  in  which  it 
was  alleged  they  were  treated  most  cruelly.  A  delegation  of 
these  prisoners  was  sent  to  Washington  with  the  hope  that' 
they  might  induce  their  Government,  in  some  way,  to  ameli- 
orate their  condition.  They  were  made  to  understand  that 
the  interest  of  the  Government  required  that  they  should  re- 
turn to  prison  and  remain  there.  And  this  they  did.  The 
editor  of  Southern  Historical  Papers  says,  "We  have  a  letter 
from  the  wife  of  the  chairman  of  that  delegation  (now  dead) 
in  which  she  says  that  her  husband  always  said  that  he  was 
treated  more  contemptuously  by  Secretary  of  War  Stanton 
than  he  ever  was  at  Andersonville." 

One  of  the  prisoners,  Henry  M.  Brennan,  writes :   "I  was 


^'R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  II,  p.  602. 


50 

at  Andersonville  when  the  delegation  of  prisoners  spoken  of 
left  there  to  plead  our  cause  with  the  authorities  at  Washing- 
ton; and  nobody  can  tell,  unless  it  be  a  shipwrecked  and 
famished  mariner,  who  sees  a  vessel  approaching  and  then 
passing  on  without  rendering  the  required  aid,  what  fond 
hopes  were  raised  and  how  hope  sickened  into  despair,  waiting 
for  the  answer  that  never  came.  In  my  opinion,  and  that  of 
a  good  many  others,  a  good  part  of  the  responsibility  for  the 
horrors  of  Andersonville  rests  with  General  U.  S.  Grant,  who 
refused  to  make  a  fair  exchange  of  prisoners."1 

That  more  and  avoidable  cruelty  was  practised  upon  Con- 
federate soldiers  in  Northern  prisons  than  upon  Federal  sol- 
diers in  Southern  prisons  is  abundantly  proven  by  the  fact  that 
out  of  220,000  of  the  former  26,000  died,  while  of  the  latter, 
out  of  270,000,  22,000  died.2 

From  the  beginning  of  the  war,  and  for  some  time  after, 
high  officials  of  the  United  States  were  anxious  to  spread 
abroad  in  this  country  and  in  Europe  declarations  of  the  pur- 
poses of  the  Government,  of  what  it  intended  to  do  and  what 
not  to  do.  April  22,  1861,  W.  H.  Seward,  Secretary  of  State, 
in  a  despatch  to  the  United  States  Minister  to  France,  wrote 


*"R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  II,  p.  603. 
*Idem,  p.  607. 


OR   BEFORE  AND   AFTER  51 

as  follows :  "The  territories  will  remain  the  same  in  all  re- 
spects, whether  the  revolution  shall  succeed  or  shall  fail  ?  The 
condition  of  slavery  in  the  several  States  will  remain  just  the 
same,  whether  it  succeed  or  fail.  There  is  not  even  a  pretext  for 
the  complaint  that  the  disaffected  States  are  to  be  conquered  by 
the  United  States  if  the  revolution  fails ;  for  the  rights  of  the 
States  and  the  condition  of  every  being  in  them  will  remain 
subject  to  exactly  the  same  laws  and  forms  of  administration, 
whether  the  revolution  shall  succeed  or  whether  it  shall  fail. 
In  one  case,  the  States  would  be  federally  connected  with  the 
new  Confederacy;  in  the  other  they  would,  as  now,  be  mem- 
bers of  the  United  States;  but  their  Constitutions  and  laws, 
customs,  habits  and  institutions,  in  either  case,  will  remain  the 
same/'1  Similar  views  were  expressed  by  many,  and  had  they 
been  honestly  carried  out,  much  suffering  and  anxiety  would 
have  been  spared  to  the  whole  country.  The  Constitutions  of 
the  several  States  in  1865  had  been  adopted  by  the  people  in 
conformity  with  the  principles  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence and  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  The 
Legislatures  had  been  organized,  and  the  members  had  been 
elected  in  accordance  with  those  principles.  De  jure  govern- 
ments, republican  in  form,  existed  in  all  these  States,  and  there 


1"R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  I,  pp.  262-263. 


52  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

was  no  authority  which  lawfully  existed  for  their  overthrow. 
According  to  the  views  of  the  Secretary,  above  cited,  when  the 
armies  of  the  Confederacy  laid  down  their  arms,  and  the  revo- 
lution had  failed,  inasmuch  as  the  Governments  of  the  seced- 
ing States  had  been  continuous  before  and  since  1860-61,  and 
as  the  Government  of  the  United  States  had  denied  that  they, 
or  any  of  them,  were  ever  "out  of  the  Union,"  the  plain  in- 
ference is,  that  they  were  still  in  the  Union  on  an  equality 
with  all  other  States. 

During  the  progress  of  the  war,  those  in  position  to  de- 
termine jthe  policy  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States  in 
disregard  of  the  Constitution  became  more  and  more  influen- 
tial, until  they  finally  dictated  what  it  should  be. 

August  6,  1861,  Congress  passed  an  act  of  Confiscation,  in 
reference  to  which  President  Lincoln  said :  "It  is  startling  to 
say  that  Congress  can  free  a  slave  within  a  State."1  In  dis- 
cussing this  bill,  Thaddeus  Stevens  asked :  "Who  pleads  the 
Constitution  against  our  proposed  action?"2  When  discussing 
the  rape  intended  upon  the  State  of  Virginia,  1861-62,  and  the 
erection  of  a  new  State  within  her  boundaries  and  jurisdic- 


l"R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.   II,  p.  169. 
2  Idem.  p.  8. 


OR   BEFORE   AND   AFTER  53 

tion,  Mr.  Stevens  said:  "We  know  that  it  is  not  Constitu- 
tional, but  it  is  necessary" 

Feb.  25,  1861,  Charles  Sumner,  Senator  from  Massachu- 
setts, declared  in  Congress:  "I  do  not  think  that  Congress 
has  any  right  to  interfere  with  slavery  in  a  State."1 

July  /,  1862,  General  McClellan,  commanding  the  Federal 
army  around  Richmond,  wrote  to  the  authorities  at  Washing- 
ton :  "A  declaration  of  radical  views,  especially  upon  slavery, 
will  rapidly  disintegrate  our  armies."2 

May  9,  1862,  General  Hunter  issued  an  order  declaring  the 
"persons  held  as  slaves  in  Georgia,  Florida  and  South  Carolina 
to  be  forever  free."  (Evidently  an  attempt  to  incite  the  slaves 
to  insurrection  and  all  its  horrors,  and  a  plain  violation  of  the 
Constitution.)  May  ipth.  President  Lincoln  declared  the 
order  void.3 

July  12,  1862,  President  Lincoln,  alluding  to  the  stress 
being  brought  to  bear  for  the  emancipation  of  slaves,  re- 
marked :  "The  pressure  in  this  direction  is  still  upon  me,  and 
is  increasing."4 

Notwithstanding  all  the  promises  that  had  been  made  that 


1"R.  &  F.  Confederate  Government,"  Vol.  II,  p.   160. 
sldem,  pp.   9-10. 
*Idem,  p.  181. 
'Idem,  p.   182. 


54  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

slavery  should  not  be  interfered  with,  the  admissions  that 
neither  the  President  nor  Congress  had  any  right  to  abolish  it, 
as  it  was  protected  by  the  Constitution,  and  the  fear  expressed 
by  General  McClellan  that  the  agitation  of  the  subject  would 
"disintegrate  our  armies,"  "the  pressure  brought  to  bear" 
finally  overcame  President  Lincoln's  scruples,  and  on  Sept. 
22,  1862,  he  issued  a  preliminary  proclamation  of  emancipa- 
tion. 

It  has  been  claimed  that  slavery  was  the  cause  of  the  war, 
that  the  Southern  States  seceded  for  the  purpose  of  protect- 
ing and  perpetuating  it.  The  truth  is  that  property  right  in 
slaves  was  protected  and  guaranteed  by  the  Constitution ;  that 
a  political  party  had  become  dominant,  whose  fixed  determina- 
tion was  to  deny  this  right  and  to  set  the  slaves  free.  If  the 
denial  of  any  other  right,  such,  for  instance,  as  representation 
in  Congress  on  the  basis  of  population,  had  been  threatened 
for  years,  and  all  hope  of  its  continuance,  for  good  and  suffi- 
cient reason,  had  been  abandoned,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose — 
can  it  be  doubted — that  the  States  to  whom  the  right  was  de- 
nied— North  or  South — would  have  resorted  to  secession? 

War  ceased  in  the  land,  but  the  promise  made  by  Secretary 
Seward,  above  quoted,  that  "their  Constitutions  and  laws, 
habits  and  institutions,  will  remain  the  same,"  proved  illusory. 


OR   BEFORE  AND   AFTER  55 

March  2,  1867,  Congress  passed  what  is  known  as  the 
"Reconstruction  Act,"  in  part  as  follows :  "Whereas  no  legal 
State  Governments  exist  in  the  rebel  States  *  *  *  and  where- 
as it  is  necessary  that  peace  and  good  order  should  be  enforced 
in  said  States  until  loyal  and  Republican  State  Governments 
can  be  established;  therefore,  be  it  enacted,  etc.,  that  the  said 
rebel  States  shall  be  divided  into  military  districts  and  made 
subject  to  the  military  authority  of  the  United  States,  etc." 

SEC.  2.  "That  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  President  to  as- 
sign to  the  command  of  each  of  said  districts  an  officer  of  the 
army,  not  below  the  rank  of  brigadier-general,  etc." 

A  supplemental  Reconstruction  Act  was  passed  March  23, 
1867. 

The  commanding  officers  were  duly  appointed  and  as- 
sumed charge. 

By  these  acts  many  of  the  intelligent,  honorable  white 
citizens  were  disfranchised.  Those  who  owned  property  in 
the  States  were  deprived  of  any  voice  in  the  management  of 
State  affairs.  The  slaves  were  not  only  set  free,  but  were 
clothed  with  all  the  rights,  privileges  and  duties  of  citizenship. 
In  the  meantime  swarms  of  "carpet  baggers,"  following  the 
victorious  armies,  had  settled  upon  the  prostrate  States,  which, 
in  their  helpless  condition,  offered  rich  fields  for  plunder. 


56  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

These  monsters,  destitute  of  honor,  governed  only  by  base 
selfishness,  affiliated  with  the  negroes,  organized  them  into  all 
kinds  of  secret,  oath-bound  societies,  instigating  in  their  igno- 
rant minds  sentiments  of  bitter  hatred  against  the  whites,  upon 
whom  they  had  been  thrust  as  slaves — principally  by  "Yankee" 
greed.  The  horrible  conditions  brought  about  by  the  circum- 
stances can  be  better  imagined  than  described. 

However,  these  conditions  finally  improved.  The  seceding 
States  were  restored  to  the  Union  ( from  which  they  had  never 
departed),  and  intelligence  regained  its  control. 

It  is  but  natural  that  the  negroes,  removed  from  their 
savage  ancestors  by  only  two  hundred  and  fifty  years,  or  less, 
kept  in  bondage,  and,  necessarily,  in  ignorance,  though  treated 
kindly  and  with  every  consideration  their  numbers  and  con- 
dition permitted,  should  be  duped  by  designing  scoundrels, 
and  should  "mistake  liberty  for  license."  This  they  did  to 
such  excess  that  the  very  lives  of  the  States  depended  upon 
their  suppression — a  fact  now  almost  universally  admitted. 
They  had  been  contented  laborers  in  slavery,  and  were  gener- 
ally loyal  to  their  owners  during  the  war.  Considerable  num- 
bers, but  few  in  proportion  to  the  whole,  left  their  homes  and 
kindred  and  enlisted  in  the  Federal  armies.  From  the  white 
man's  standpoint  this  was  commendable.  Liberty  worth  hav- 


OR   BEFORE   AN D   AFTER  57 

ing  is  worth  fighting  for.  It  is  greatly  to  their  credit,  how- 
ever, that  the  negroes  who  remained  at  home  were  not  guilty 
of  insurrection,  and  no  instance  is  on  record  of  assault  upon 
a  white  woman  during  the  war  by  .them.  For  the  manner 
in  which  they  cultivated  the  fields,  for  the  respect  shown  by 
them  to  women  and  children  during  the  war,  the  Southern 
people  should  be  very  thankful. 

More  than  forty  years  have  now  passed  since  the  war 
closed.  Peace  and  good-will  unite  the  sections,  and  a  more 
fraternal  feeling  than  ever  before  exists.  The  real  cause  of  the 
war  was  the  jealousy — the  intolerance — of  the  New  England 
character,  called  into  action  by  the  imagined  wrongs  and  cru- 
elties practised  upon  the  poor  negroes,  whom  they  had  made 
slaves.  Their  responsibility  seemed  to  be  followed  by  remorse. 
Men  and  whole  communities  went  daft,  were  seized  with 
fanatical  zeal  on  the  subject,  until  "judgment  had  fled  to 
brutish  beasts  and  men  had  lost  their  reason."  But  whether 
the  cause  of  the  war,  01  only  an  incident  leading  to  it,  slavery 
is  forever  abolished  among  the  people  of  the  United  States, 
and  the  former  slaveholders  acknowledge  a  blessing  in  this. 
Few,  if  any  of  them,  would  restore  it  if  they  could. 

Since  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves,  the  whole  country 
has  entered  upon  a  new  and  better  era — an  era  o5t  happiness 


58  ALL  AROUND  THE  CIVIL  WAR 

and  prosperity  heretofore  unknown,  and  this  is  largely  due  to 
the  failure  of  the  Southern  Confederacy  and  the  abolition  of 
slavery.  No  longer  is  heard  the  charge  of  disloyalty  to  the 
Government.  We  are  again  an  united  people,  as  our  fore- 
fathers were  in  1776.  In  our  patriotism  there  is  no  sectional- 
ism. The  only  strife  among  us  is  in  the  noble  emulation  of 
who  can  best  strive  and  best  serve  for  the  public  good.  The 
most  prominent  cause  of  sectional  dissension  being  removed, 
economic  questions  are  discussed  with  more  patience  and  for- 
bearance and  less  acrimony  than  formerly.  There  is  no  threat 
of  a  crisis  in  our  country's  affairs  similar  to  that  through 
which  we  passed  forty  odd  years  ago,  and  the  manifest  destiny 
of  our  great  Republic  is  to  hold  a  high  place  among  the  na- 
tions forever.  We  have  come  to  know  each  other  better,  and 
this  "diffused  knowledge  has  immortalized  itself." 

We  have  "One  Country,  One  Constitution,  One  Destiny." 

"The  union  of  hearts,  the  union  of  hands, 

And  the  flag  of  our  union  forever." 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNTA 
Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  *>: 


1955 


CM 

in 
c^ 

en 

UD 

CD 


UN1VKKSITY  01 
AT 

LOS  ANGELES 
LIBRARY 


versity  of  Cajifornia 


University  Of  California  Los  Angeles 


^,?°,U.T"ERN..REG|ONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


